MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389326654 · doi:10.25259/csdm_204_2023

Efficacy of erbium yttrium aluminium garnet laser on post-traumatic scars among Indian population – A non-randomized study

2023· article· en· W4389326654 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ravi Kumar Chittoria, K Nishad, BarathKumar Singh Parthiban

Bibliographic record

VenueCosmoderma · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAblative caseScarsMedicineSurgeryEr:YAG laserErbiumYttrium aluminium garnetLaserOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The post-trauma scar is a common problem; it can produce physical and psychological difficulties to the patient. The use of ablative and non-ablative lasers based on the fractional approach is emerging as a method to treat scars. However, very limited data are available of the same in patients of South India. In this study, the authors demonstrated the efficacy of ablative fractional resurfacing (AFR) for traumatic scars using a 2940-nm erbium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er: YAG) laser for the treatment of post-traumatic scars in patients of south India. Material and Methods: Seventy-three scars were enrolled in adults of age between 18 and 60 years. Each scar was treated four times at 1-month intervals with a fractional ablative 2940-nm Er: YAG laser using the same parameters. Pre-treatment evaluation before the initiation of the treatment and post-treatment evaluation was performed 1 month after the fourth treatment session of laser. The scar was evaluated using Vancouver scar scale (VSS). Results: All 73 scars completed the study. After ablative fractional laser treatment, all treated portions of the scars showed improvements, as demonstrated by the VSS. Conclusion: This study shows that ablative fractional application of Er: YAG laser treatment of scars reduces scars fairly. The authors suggest that treatment using AFR can be a adjuvant scar management method for improving the quality of life of patients with post-traumatic scars in patients of south India.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCosmodermaSame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207